No Selling, Buying Or Trading Of Votes Allowed
from the what-we-need-are-anti-votes! dept
It's semi-official. It's not quite legal to swap your vote with anyone (at least according to California). Actually, you can't "broker the exchange of votes" which really just means that the websites that facilitate the process are illegal. Still, no one has really addressed the underlying issues of why people want to swap votes. Maybe we need to propose a new voting process....
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
anti votes
Yes, there are plenty of problems with this idea, and don't attack me for bringing it up. I just think it's cool to think about.
The fact is a lot of people will be voting for the lesser of two evils in order to keep the more evil person out of office, and it hardly strikes me as a valid "mandate of the people" to find you backed your way into office by being "less evil".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: anti votes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
Mathematical economist Kenneth Arrow proved (in 1952) that there is NO consistent method of making a fair choice among three or more candidates. This remarkable result assures us that there is no single election procedure that can always fairly decide the outcome of an election that involves more than two candidates or alternatives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]